Jump to content


Quality Rating 2 - designed to favour non-pad gamestyles


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
170 replies to this topic

chaos7 #161 Posted 01 March 2013 - 12:33 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 28044 battles
  • 757
  • Member since:
    07-14-2011

View Postradd666, on 01 March 2013 - 08:51 AM, said:

They are ordinary people like us. Are we having fun? Yes. And no... :) This is the time to finale go and look at those brutal stats of nerderklauns.

They're not THAT bad. They're just nowhere near what they should look like after 25000 battles and they're nowhere near what they should look like according to the way nerdertroll presents himself.

They just indicate what Miros said - he still has no insight in random battles and seems to fail at them rather unspectacularly in a highly average way.

Gr3yDeath #162 Posted 01 March 2013 - 12:48 PM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 29996 battles
  • 228
  • Member since:
    12-29-2011
It's going 'nerder' and 'nerder' down to the 'nerdest' point.

nerderklaus #163 Posted 01 March 2013 - 05:57 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 45508 battles
  • 1,502
  • [HARDS] HARDS
  • Member since:
    04-03-2012

View PostPrivate_Miros, on 28 February 2013 - 11:07 PM, said:

No, he's making perfect sense.

He's just protecting himself to the realisation that after a full year of 8 hours per day of WoT, he still has no insight into playing random battles...

I'd prefer being illogical too to realizing that...

Well, thats audacious again. Just seing random matchmaking actually is enough to comprehend the core mechanics and you greatly miscalculated my average game time. It's a matter of 0,1 seconds to comprehend what you couldn't comprehend with so much contribution. Propably it is less than your noob battle gameplay and theory inventing combined :)

View Postradd666, on 01 March 2013 - 08:51 AM, said:

They are ordinary people like us. Are we having fun? Yes. And no... :) This is the time to finale go and look at those brutal stats of nerderklauns.

If you would have ever learned a difficult game you would know that pubs, in particular random ones and taking them serious is the most reliable way to show poor player qualities. Well, I doubt you have lots of fun when being the tier 8 in a top tier 10 random with 1-7 within 2,5 minutes, your own tier X totalling 1000 damage with each and every enemy tier X being over 3000.

Edited by nerderklaus, 01 March 2013 - 05:59 PM.


Private_Miros #164 Posted 01 March 2013 - 06:01 PM

    Field Marshal

  • Player
  • 25238 battles
  • 10,152
  • [EMU87] EMU87
  • Member since:
    07-09-2011

View Postnerderklaus, on 01 March 2013 - 05:57 PM, said:

Well, thats audacious again. Just seing random matchmaking actually is enough to comprehend the core mechanics and you greatly miscalculated my average game time. It's a matter of 0,1 seconds to comprehend what you couldn't comprehend with so much contribution. Propably it is less than your noob battle gameplay and theory inventing combined :)

Quoted for double the laughing experience.

radd666 #165 Posted 01 March 2013 - 07:57 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 19284 battles
  • 2,498
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    03-06-2012

View Postnerderklaus, on 01 March 2013 - 05:57 PM, said:

Well, thats audacious again. Just seing random matchmaking actually is enough to comprehend the core mechanics and you greatly miscalculated my average game time. It's a matter of 0,1 seconds to comprehend what you couldn't comprehend with so much contribution. Propably it is less than your noob battle gameplay and theory inventing combined :)



If you would have ever learned a difficult game you would know that pubs, in particular random ones and taking them serious is the most reliable way to show poor player qualities. Well, I doubt you have lots of fun when being the tier 8 in a top tier 10 random with 1-7 within 2,5 minutes, your own tier X totalling 1000 damage with each and every enemy tier X being over 3000.


Is Dungeons and Dragons enough of a ''difficulty''. Nvm.

Believe it or not i dish out a lot of damage in a T7-8 tank when playing with tougher opponents(baby-munch XP for not doing so). I know the game pretty well by now (been here since 0.7.2 or maybe earlier, not sure, can't remember) , the problem are those ''other'' lower tier tanks with the gold ammo. Before ''that incident'' with gold ammo for creds, you knew exactly what opponents you could ''play with'', so to speak and suffer the consequences if you exaggerate. Now, it's all gone. You can't play your tank like it's supposed to be played because that fuc...g T21 spams you with damage and i, in my T20 shoot him with 1-3 (almost normative) 0dmg penetrations. Nothing funny and amusing there. It's showing it's pattern slowly. I had cca 50-70. battles in the past few days. I admit my eff wasn't above average (1100), WN6,7,8 unknown) Those battles ended with me dying let's say 85% of them, 50% no kills just damage, 1 or 2 medals (I love shiny medals *o*), more frequent 0dmg shots (which tend to come to a culmination during close combat and decisive shots) , or missing/ghost-shell a tank at point blank range (in D'nD it means you get +1 attack modifier on your dice roll for every attack made within 30 ft. of the opponent :)). +there exist a trillion topics about that kind of cr..p anyway, so why even bother continuing? .

That kind of fun ended after precisely 0.8.4 patch. Whatever i do i can't influence games, let my team know that there is a gap in the defenses or whatever. Ignore, ignore, ignorance and some more ignorance and ignoring. That's all you get. Today i had a breakdown in a tier 6 battle, with my M4 Sherman derpyderpderp...i said the most awful stuff to the team. I just lost it the battle before and was (for the first time) so pissed i decided to start a new battle where i would ''punish'' my so called team for being complete duchebags. The battle countdown started and we were on Mines so i cooled down and played along. Did 2000 damage and ''won'' the hill alone with some Chinese light. I died because of inpatience and then it all started. My Lord. Sad moment for me when i get like this over a game, but that's the frickin' point. ''Normal'' people seem to fail at playing VIDEO GAMES!!! I am very dissapoint, son...

Edit #2: Probably needs more editing. Sorry for that. #3: I didn't use words like noob and the like, so I am kind of proud. #4: What does pubs mean? Srsly. Something to do with age? C'mon...

Edited by radd666, 01 March 2013 - 08:42 PM.


Nazgarth #166 Posted 01 March 2013 - 08:12 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 28472 battles
  • 1,223
  • [-TWO-] -TWO-
  • Member since:
    05-07-2011
I look forward to reading this thread to see what nonesense nerderklaus has written; always provides a good laugh.

Gr3yDeath #167 Posted 02 March 2013 - 12:15 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 29996 battles
  • 228
  • Member since:
    12-29-2011
Most of people don't agree with u nerderklaus.

And when majority doesn't agree with someone there are 2 possibilities: either he is genious or simply dumb.
Thing is that genious people rather don't spend the time on computer games.

Jukelo #168 Posted 02 March 2013 - 12:22 PM

    Colonel

  • Beta Tester
  • 26551 battles
  • 3,608
  • Member since:
    08-13-2010

View Postnerderklaus, on 01 March 2013 - 05:57 PM, said:

Well, thats audacious again. Just seing random matchmaking actually is enough to comprehend the core mechanics and you greatly miscalculated my average game time. It's a matter of 0,1 seconds to comprehend what you couldn't comprehend with so much contribution. Propably it is less than your noob battle gameplay and theory inventing combined :)

Indeed, he did. Miros probably used his own average battle time, which is certainly that of a good player, and didn't take into account your own performance.

I played 12982 games, totalling about 1031 hours of World Of Tanks. My survival rate is 33%. Average battle time is 4m46s.
You played about twice that amount of battles, 25 389, but your survival rate is lower, 20%, meaning you probably spend less time in battle.
Since I don't know your average battle time, I went and checked mine in tanks with which I have a survival rate in the 20s, to get an idea of what it could look like. It ranges from 3m30s to 4m30s. Ofc, these are mostly medium and light tanks, and quite low tiers, where battle are much shorter while your 20% survival rate also applies to your heavy tanks, even high tiers one, so I guess the real figure will be closer to 4m30s than 3m30s (especially considering you hand around long enough to still have average or slightly above average results)
Using that average battle time range, we get between 1481 hours and 1904 hours.

You registered approximately 11 months ago, ~330 days, giving between 4.5 and 5.8 hours of WoT a day.

Xensation #169 Posted 02 March 2013 - 01:13 PM

    Lieutenant General

  • Clan Commander
  • 17771 battles
  • 7,730
  • [IDEAL] IDEAL
  • Member since:
    06-08-2012
He played well above 70 battles a day and unless he jumps from one battle to another like a random scrub it's easily 8 hours and more per day. Average battletime around 4 minutes, you usually don't start the game instantly, you have the matchmaking queue, 30 sec countdown at the beginning, etc.

HubertGruber #170 Posted 02 March 2013 - 02:10 PM

    Captain

  • Beta Tester
  • 25765 battles
  • 2,176
  • Member since:
    01-15-2011
I play for fun.

radd666 #171 Posted 02 March 2013 - 09:34 PM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 19284 battles
  • 2,498
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    03-06-2012
Yup. No fun in loosing eyesight. O.o




2 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 2 guests, 0 anonymous users